On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 09:16 +1000, Res wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
This is wrong. if you have evidence, show it. if not, stop spreading
rumours. I have delisted an IP in the past, and I have been watching
people trying to delist a block but without clues on
On Wed, June 24, 2009 13:59, Per Jessen wrote:
Blacklisting a large and serious hosting provider is just not serious
and very bad for business.
Benny Pedersen wrote:
http://rfc-ignorant.org/tools/lookup.php?domain=yahoo.com
http://rfc-ignorant.org/tools/lookup.php?domain=hotmail.com
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
Personally I have mixed views on charging for delisting. In some
instances it would be appropriate and I would not dismiss it out of
hand. Certainly for repeat offenders I think it would be highly
desirable.
Agreed, its one wya to make the
Jason Haar wrote:
Speaking of image/rtf/word attachment spam; is there any work going on
to standardize this so that the textual output of such attachments could
be fed back into SA?
On 24.06.09 19:33, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
Just as a note:
I'm currently working on a modular plugin for
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 17:41 +1000, Res wrote:
if you jump on a bandwagon without first hand experience, thats *exactly*
what you are, if you had experienced it first hand of course you become an
authority on the subject in your your case, and your opinion matters as
factual, but you by your
Hello,
I'm wondering if I'm missing some rules that would have given this
message more points - I know it's missing bayes (I'm not sure why as our
servers should use bayes, but it seems not to have been run for this
message.)
http://www.pastebin.ca/1473975
Thanks
--
Andrew.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 17:41 +1000, Res wrote:
if you jump on a bandwagon without first hand experience, thats *exactly*
what you are, if you had experienced it first hand of course you become an
authority on the subject in your your case, and
There's been a rule circulating this mailing list for a couple of weeks.
This is the latest edition to catch those med-things (afaik).
--
body AE_MEDS35 /\bwww\s(?:\W\s)?\w{3,6}\d{2,6}\s(?:\W\s)?(?:c\s?o
\s?m|n\s?e\s?t|o\s?r\s?g)\b/i
describe AE_MEDS35 obfuscated domain in message
A routine look in the logs shows me a steady warn in the logs.
It's probably harmless - but I would like to solve it for tidiness:
Thu Jun 18 16:45:21 2009 [12663] warn: config: created user preferences
file: /var/lib/spamassassin/.spamassassin/user_prefs
Tue Jun 23 16:58:42 2009 [13778] warn:
For the upcoming release, we're considering dropping support for that
interpreter version. If you're still using 5.6.x, or know of a
(relatively recent) distro that does, please reply to highlight
this
--j.
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 18:24 +1000, Res wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 17:41 +1000, Res wrote:
if you jump on a bandwagon without first hand experience, thats *exactly*
what you are, if you had experienced it first hand of course you
On 24-Jun-2009, at 08:20, Roger Marquis wrote:
PLUGPostConf http://www.postconf.com for example./PLUG
Looks interesting, but not FreBSD demo :/
--
There is no Humpty Dumpty, and there is no God. None, not
one, no God, never was.
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 03:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 24-Jun-2009, at 08:20, Roger Marquis wrote:
PLUGPostConf http://www.postconf.com for example./PLUG
Looks interesting, but not FreBSD demo :/
Webmin?
http://www.webmin.com/
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 19:00 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Benny Pedersen wrote:
2) I didn't include free email providers in my list of large and
serious hosting providers - I was thinking more of organisations
such as 1and1, hetzner, rackspace etc. etc.
My
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Wed, June 24, 2009 13:59, Per Jessen wrote:
3) I wouldn't refer to rfc-ignorant as a blacklist - nobody with half
a brain would block email just because of RFC ignorance on the part
of the sender.
Why not? I do that and intentionally - I don't like
Arvid Picciani wrote:
serious hosting providers - I was thinking more of organisations
such as 1and1, hetzner, rackspace etc. etc.
whats the issue with hetzner? I'm a customer so i'd be very
interested in any spam issue not beeing processed by them.
There is no issue with Hetzner. Read
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 11:39 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 19:00 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Benny Pedersen wrote:
2) I didn't include free email providers in my list of large and
serious hosting providers - I was thinking more of
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 11:39 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 19:00 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Benny Pedersen wrote:
2) I didn't include free email providers in my list of large and
serious hosting providers - I
On 25-Jun-2009, at 02:44, Justin Mason wrote:
For the upcoming release, we're considering dropping support for that
interpreter version. If you're still using 5.6.x, or know of a
(relatively recent) distro that does, please reply to highlight
this
If moving away from 5.6 makes SA better
On 25-Jun-2009, at 03:22, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 03:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 24-Jun-2009, at 08:20, Roger Marquis wrote:
PLUGPostConf http://www.postconf.com for example./PLUG
Looks interesting, but not FreBSD demo :/
Webmin?
http://www.webmin.com/
I've
Justin Mason schrieb:
For the upcoming release, we're considering dropping support for that
interpreter version. If you're still using 5.6.x, or know of a
(relatively recent) distro that does, please reply to highlight
this
--j.
Don't know if it's still relevant: Solaris 8
# uname
Jan P. Kessler schrieb:
Justin Mason schrieb:
For the upcoming release, we're considering dropping support for that
interpreter version. If you're still using 5.6.x, or know of a
(relatively recent) distro that does, please reply to highlight
this
--j.
Don't know if
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Wed, June 24, 2009 13:59, Per Jessen wrote:
3) I wouldn't refer to rfc-ignorant as a blacklist - nobody with half
a brain would block email just because of RFC ignorance on the part
of the sender.
Why not? I do that and intentionally - I don't
On 25-Jun-2009, at 03:55, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 11:39 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 19:00 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Benny Pedersen wrote:
2) I didn't include free email providers in my list of large and
serious
On 25-Jun-2009, at 04:15, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Don't know if it's still relevant: Solaris 8
# uname -a
SunOS mailhub 5.8 Generic_108528-09 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-250
# perl -v
This is perl, version 5.005_03 built for sun4-solaris
5.00? snigger
;)
--
Instant karma's going to get you!
Could this thread be moved to spam-l ?
Seems it has little to do with SA
On 23-Jun-2009, at 06:31, McDonald, Dan wrote:
Guess I'd best make a list...
Share?
--
We all need help with our feelings. Otherwise, we bottle them up,
and before you know it powerful laxatives are involved.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:21:25PM +0200, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Jan P. Kessler schrieb:
Justin Mason schrieb:
For the upcoming release, we're considering dropping support for that
interpreter version. If you're still using 5.6.x, or know of a
(relatively recent) distro that does,
Henrik K schrieb:
sorry, just missed the relatively recent statement ;-)
When the system gets old enough that it's not supported officially and you
are forced to manually CPAN fresh modules (and possibly wreak havoc on the
OS), there is no reason not to compile your own perl (or upgrade
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 11:15, Jan P. Kesslersal...@jpkessler.info wrote:
Justin Mason schrieb:
For the upcoming release, we're considering dropping support for that
interpreter version. If you're still using 5.6.x, or know of a
(relatively recent) distro that does, please reply to highlight
On Wednesday 24 June 2009 22:41:00 Steven W. Orr wrote:
On 06/24/09 16:15, quoth René Berber:
Steven W. Orr wrote:
[snip]
There is something close: have you seen the Habu plugin?
Its used to report spam (to SpamCop for instance), it works by sending
anything you marked as spam as
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 13:20 +0200, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Henrik K schrieb:
SA is trying to be too supportive for the money it receives. ;-) If you ask
me, just ditch this and all other old baggage for 3.3. If you are not happy,
you are free to keep running 3.2. Some people are even still
Kasper Sacharias Eenberg wrote:
There's been a rule circulating this mailing list for a couple of weeks.
This is the latest edition to catch those med-things (afaik).
--
body AE_MEDS35 /\bwww\s(?:\W\s)?\w{3,6}\d{2,6}\s(?:\W\s)?(?:c\s?o
\s?m|n\s?e\s?t|o\s?r\s?g)\b/i
describe
On Thu, June 25, 2009 10:35, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
A routine look in the logs shows me a steady warn in the logs.
It's probably harmless - but I would like to solve it for tidiness:
Thu Jun 18 16:45:21 2009 [12663] warn: config: created user preferences
file:
On Thu, June 25, 2009 11:08, LuKreme wrote:
On 24-Jun-2009, at 08:20, Roger Marquis wrote:
PLUGPostConf http://www.postconf.com for example./PLUG
Looks interesting, but not FreBSD demo :/
yes freebsd does not have the above problem :)
--
xpoint
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I'm currently working on a modular plugin for extracting text and add it
to SA message parts.
if possible, extract images too, so the fuzzyocr and similar plugins would
be able to look at that too.
You meen extract images and add them as parts to the message?
On Thu, June 25, 2009 11:22, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 03:08 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 24-Jun-2009, at 08:20, Roger Marquis wrote:
PLUGPostConf http://www.postconf.com for example./PLUG
Looks interesting, but not FreBSD demo :/
Webmin?
http://www.webmin.com/
i
On Thu, June 25, 2009 12:14, LuKreme wrote:
I've used webmin, and have it installed. It is not luser friendly
though.
http://www.webmin.com/index6.html usermin is for you then :)
--
xpoint
Hi,
I'd like to filter out backscatter with the DNSBL from
ips.backscatterer.org. In order not to filter out legitimate mails, but
only NDA noise and stuff, I want to limit it to mails with blank
envelope from (MAIL FROM: ) or envelope from postmaster (MAIL FROM:
postmas...@example.com).
I'm not
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
1. It's 'You're' a joke - not 'your' a joke
Ah the classic sign of someone in defeat, has to nit pick someones grammer
2. You could always try setting up your Mickey Mouse 'blocked using
dnsbl.lan' restriction so it works properly LOL.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 02:36:15PM +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 13:20 +0200, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Henrik K schrieb:
SA is trying to be too supportive for the money it receives. ;-) If you
ask
me, just ditch this and all other old baggage for 3.3. If you
How long will this go before Godwin's law finally kicks in? Now I'm
just watching for the fun of it .
Quoting Res r...@ausics.net:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
1. It's 'You're' a joke - not 'your' a joke
Ah the classic sign of someone in defeat, has to nit pick
On Thu, June 25, 2009 15:08, Res wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
Actually, you were first blocked by a milter because your SPF record
contains junk get someone with a clue to set it up for you
http://old.openspf.org/wizard.html?mydomain=buzzhost.co.uksubmit=Go!
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 13:20 +0200, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Henrik K schrieb:
SA is trying to be too supportive for the money it receives. ;-) If you ask
me, just ditch this and all other old baggage for 3.3. If you are not happy,
you are free to keep running 3.2.
On Thu, June 25, 2009 14:56, Henrik K wrote:
I'm just not sure why ask in the first place. Perl 5.6.1 is old. Anyone
using such system most likely has no support. Anyone using such perl most
likely shouldn't be allowed to use it. You could be already fixing the
code and not waiting. ;)
old
Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 02:36:15PM +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 13:20 +0200, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Henrik K schrieb:
SA is trying to be too supportive for the money it receives. ;-)
If you ask me, just ditch this and all other old baggage for
2009/6/25 Ned Slider n...@unixmail.co.uk:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 13:20 +0200, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Henrik K schrieb:
SA is trying to be too supportive for the money it receives. ;-) If you
ask
me, just ditch this and all other old baggage for 3.3. If you are not
John Rudd wrote:
I've seen LOTS of so-focused-on-stability if it ain't broke, don't
upgrade it type shops in the Solaris arena ...
You'll likely find that in any production environment that is concerned
about uptime. The less change, the more uptime.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
On 25.06.09 12:38, Yet Another Ninja wrote:
Could this thread be moved to spam-l ?
Seems it has little to do with SA
spam-l was closed iirc ;-)
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie:
On 25-Jun-2009, at 04:15, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Don't know if it's still relevant: Solaris 8
# uname -a
SunOS mailhub 5.8 Generic_108528-09 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-250
# perl -v
This is perl, version 5.005_03 built for sun4-solaris
On 25.06.09 04:37, LuKreme wrote:
5.00? snigger
5.005
Jack Pepper wrote:
How long will this go before Godwin's law finally kicks in? Now I'm
just watching for the fun of it .
Yea, this is why when my bosses ask where I get my information I tell
them from a closed forum. If they read the adolescent ramblings that got
posted on email/spam
On 6/25/2009 4:12 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 25.06.09 12:38, Yet Another Ninja wrote:
Could this thread be moved to spam-l ?
Seems it has little to do with SA
spam-l was closed iirc ;-)
yes and no
it was taken over and its nice busy
http://spam-l.com/mailman/listinfo
Seems like it's gonna cost some of the big boys a little coin...
http://detroit.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/de062209.htm
Let's hope there are more indictments where these came from!
rnd
stopwatch sussex trait
warmup sporadic
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 07:11, Per Jessenp...@computer.org wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
I've seen LOTS of so-focused-on-stability if it ain't broke, don't
upgrade it type shops in the Solaris arena ...
You'll likely find that in any production environment that is concerned
about uptime. The
On Thu, June 25, 2009 18:14, Isabel Billings wrote:
stopwatch sussex trait
warmup sporadic
Resent-From: Steven W. Orr ste...@syslang.net
Resent-To: spamassassin-users users@spamassassin.apache.org
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:43:41 -0400
Resent-Message-Id: 4a438d1d.3070...@syslang.net
I recently got this spam that made its way thru SpamAssassin:
http://pastebin.ca/1474274
Looks like it was received from mail.apache.org which is in the
DNSWL.org DB, unsurprisingly. Why would mail.apache.org send out this
obvious spam?
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
Jonas Eckerman wrote:
You meen extract images and add them as parts to the message?
I guess that should be doable. I know that unrtf can extract images
from RTF files. I'll probably implement support for this, but I'll
probably not implement actually doing it right away.
This'll probably
To reply to myself
I guess that was sent to the spamassassin.apache.org list and the list
was BCC'd so it didn't get put into my list folder. Ah well.
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
Jeremy Morton wrote:
I recently got this spam that made its way thru SpamAssassin:
On Thu, June 25, 2009 17:10, Jeremy Morton wrote:
Looks like it was received from mail.apache.org which is in the
DNSWL.org DB, unsurprisingly. Why would mail.apache.org send out this
obvious spam?
blame mozilla thunderbird for the resent headers, the problem is that one user
release
My oldest server has 5.8, and it's a really out of date box.
My newest out-of-date box has 5.8.8-36 (opensuse 10.2).
Antispam and email is a fast changing technology (compared to other server
things like file and print and http), so I see no reason why people should try
to adapt an old system
On Thu, June 25, 2009 17:20, Jeremy Morton wrote:
I guess that was sent to the spamassassin.apache.org list and the list
was BCC'd so it didn't get put into my list folder. Ah well.
with sieve:
if header :contains List-Id users.spamassassin.apache.org
{
fileinto maillists.spamassassin;
stop;
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I'm currently working on a modular plugin for extracting text and add
it to SA message parts.
if possible, extract images too, so the fuzzyocr and similar plugins would
be able to look at that too.
You meen extract images and add them as parts to the
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Matus UHLAR -
fantomasuh...@fantomas.sk wrote:
I am not sure but I think something alike was done. What I mean is to have
generic chain of format converters, where at the end would be plain image
or even text, that could be processed by classic rules like
At 08:10 25-06-2009, Jeremy Morton wrote:
I recently got this spam that made its way thru SpamAssassin:
[non-persistent information snipped]
Looks like it was received from mail.apache.org which is in the
DNSWL.org DB, unsurprisingly. Why would mail.apache.org send out
this obvious spam?
On Thu, June 25, 2009 17:56, SM wrote:
What rules would you recommend to catch it?
something as this on apache.org:
header __RESENT1 exists:Resent-From
header __RESENT2 exists:Resent-To
header __RESENT3 exists:Resent-Date
header __RESENT4 exists:Resent-Message-Id
meta NO_RESENT_MAIL
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
This I don't understand. Do they put PDFs inside .doc files as if the
..doc was an archive?
I am not sure but I think something alike was done.
Considering that an OpenXML format is basically a zip file with XML
files inside and that the actual document can
Per Jessen wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
I've seen LOTS of so-focused-on-stability if it ain't broke, don't
upgrade it type shops in the Solaris arena ...
You'll likely find that in any production environment that is concerned
about uptime. The less change, the more uptime.
As far
Is anybody else getting bounces on mail they send to the list from
cas...@snigelpost.org?
If so, can we get him unsubscribed?
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 --
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
I am not sure but I think something alike was done. What I mean is to have
generic chain of format converters, where at the end would be plain image
or even text, that could be processed by classic rules like bayes,
replacetags etc.
Already exists, check recent list
John Hardin wrote:
Is anybody else getting bounces on mail they send to the list from
cas...@snigelpost.org?
Yep. I wish backscatter.org had a reporting and educating form. Ie
automaticaly inform the postmaster of that system of the listing
incuding educational material how to fix it.
Jack Pepper wrote:
How long will this go before Godwin's law finally kicks in?
It already did.
1. It's 'You're' a joke - not 'your' a joke
Now I'm just watching for the fun of it
Try IRC :-P
On Thu, June 25, 2009 19:09, John Hardin wrote:
Is anybody else getting bounces on mail they send to the list from
cas...@snigelpost.org?
If so, can we get him unsubscribed?
here i have seen 25 of this bouncers, i have added his sender ip into postfwd
client_address until its resolved, i
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 10:09 -0700, John Hardin wrote:
Is anybody else getting bounces on mail they send to the list from
cas...@snigelpost.org?
Taking care of that, already poked the almighty admins.
--
char *t=\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4;
main(){ char
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, June 25, 2009 19:09, John Hardin wrote:
Is anybody else getting bounces on mail they send to the list from
cas...@snigelpost.org?
If so, can we get him unsubscribed?
here i have seen 25 of this bouncers, i have added his sender ip into
On Thu, June 25, 2009 19:34, John Hardin wrote:
Sure, but that doesn't help anybody else that posts to the list.
it will if admins at remote read there logs, but yes we can only wait now
--
xpoint
At 09:13 25-06-2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
something as this on apache.org:
header __RESENT1 exists:Resent-From
header __RESENT2 exists:Resent-To
header __RESENT3 exists:Resent-Date
header __RESENT4 exists:Resent-Message-Id
meta NO_RESENT_MAIL (__RESENT1 __RESENT2 __RESENT3 __RESENT4)
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 19:32 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Taking care of that, already poked the almighty admins.
FYI, they took care about this issue. Quite speedy. :)
--
char *t=\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4;
main(){ char
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, SM wrote:
At 09:13 25-06-2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
something as this on apache.org:
header __RESENT1 exists:Resent-From
header __RESENT2 exists:Resent-To
header __RESENT3 exists:Resent-Date
header __RESENT4 exists:Resent-Message-Id
meta NO_RESENT_MAIL (__RESENT1
On Thu, June 25, 2009 19:48, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 19:32 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Taking care of that, already poked the almighty admins.
FYI, they took care about this issue. Quite speedy. :)
so now thay using postfix ?, fixing valid recipient maps is
On Thu, June 25, 2009 19:48, John Hardin wrote:
I point out that I've had legitimate reason in the past to resend messages
to the SA list.
test my rules better, will it hit a resend from you ? :)
well repost is not a resend, so it might still not hit
--
xpoint
FYI, they took care about this issue. Quite speedy. :)
so now thay using postfix ?, fixing valid recipient maps is dangerous :)
What are you talking about, Benny? The ASF admins have removed the
offending address from the list's subscribers.
Anyway, this horse is now dead. Please stop
DAve wrote:
Jack Pepper wrote:
How long will this go before Godwin's law finally kicks in? Now I'm
just watching for the fun of it .
Yea, this is why when my bosses ask where I get my information I tell
them from a closed forum. If they read the adolescent ramblings that got
posted on
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Jonas Eckermanjonas_li...@frukt.org wrote:
Already exists, check recent list history for set_rendered.
I though that was for text only.
It is only for text.
In any case, any plugin looking for images, or a PDF, will most likely look
at MIME type and/or file
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Isabel Billings wrote:
Received: from syslang.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by saturn.syslang.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n5PEGcRM032298;
Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:16:39 -0400
Received: from domenico32832c ([217.202.8.48])
by
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Diffenderfer, Randy wrote:
Seems like it's gonna cost some of the big boys a little coin...
http://detroit.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/de062209.htm
Let's hope there are more indictments where these came from!
rnd
Yes, but Ralsky's been making millions for years, a
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
I would comment that plugins should probably skip parts they want to
render that already has rendered text available.
Ah. That's a good idea. Now I'll have to search for a nice way to check
that. :-)
I can't see how set_rendered would help in creating a fucntioning
On 25-Jun-2009, at 05:20, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
Henrik K schrieb:
SA is trying to be too supportive for the money it receives. ;-) If
you ask
me, just ditch this and all other old baggage for 3.3. If you are
not happy,
you are free to keep running 3.2. Some people are even still using
3.1.
On 25-Jun-2009, at 13:20, David B Funk wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Diffenderfer, Randy wrote:
Seems like it's gonna cost some of the big boys a little coin...
http://detroit.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/de062209.htm
Let's hope there are more indictments where these came from!
Yes, but
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Arvid Picciani wrote:
I started blocking some backscattering hosts and would like to inform
them how to fix the issue.
I still welcome suggestions for handling the few remaining cases where my
procmail chokes on a mailbox limit. Probably more of a PM question than an
SA
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, June 25, 2009 19:34, John Hardin wrote:
Sure, but that doesn't help anybody else that posts to the list.
it will if admins at remote read there logs, but yes we can only wait now
If they do, they don't act very quickly. I've been rejecting
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Jonas Eckermanjonas_li...@frukt.org wrote:
Matus example was a Word document that contained as PDF wich (might in turn
contain an image). A plugin that knows how to read word document could
extract th text of the word document and then use set_rendered to make
LuKreme wrote:
PLUGPostConf http://www.postconf.com for example./PLUG
Looks interesting, but not FreBSD demo :/
Waiting only for a postfix port with an overwrites-base option.
The code itself works with any postfix home directory.
Roger Marquis
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:09, Chris Hoogendykhoogen...@bio.umass.edu wrote:
Gone are the days when you totally avoided upgrades because of the time,
hassle and risk involved.
Time and hassle, maybe. Risk, no. Risk is not a binary, it's a
balancing act. Live updates don't remove risk, they
On 6/25/2009 11:27 PM, John Rudd wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:09, Chris Hoogendykhoogen...@bio.umass.edu wrote:
Gone are the days when you totally avoided upgrades because of the time,
hassle and risk involved.
Time and hassle, maybe. Risk, no. Risk is not a binary, it's a
balancing
Well, the point is that if it works, don't break it.
Yes, you can totally avoid upgrades, depending on your environment.
Sometimes you have no choice and continue to run old versions of
software or firmware or ...
Get over it. :)
If you want to continue debating system administration issues,
Charles Gregory wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Arvid Picciani wrote:
I started blocking some backscattering hosts and would like to inform
them how to fix the issue.
I still welcome suggestions for handling the few remaining cases where
my procmail chokes on a mailbox limit. Probably more of a
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
On 6/25/2009 11:27 PM, John Rudd wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:09, Chris
Hoogendykhoogen...@bio.umass.edu wrote:
Gone are the days when you totally avoided upgrades because of the
time,
hassle and risk involved.
Time and hassle, maybe. Risk, no. Risk is not
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 14:41, moussmo...@ml.netoyen.net wrote:
James Wilkinson a écrit :
If you mean “IP address that should not have been in the PBL but was”,
that’s one thing. It’s a consistent definition, but not very useful for
stopping spam.
yes, the PBL may list blocks that contain
James Wilkinson a écrit :
mouss wrote (about the PBL):
stop spreading FUD. if you know of false positives, show us so that we
see what you exactly mean.
a lot of people, including $self, use the PBL at smtp time.
As usual, it depends on your definition of “false positive”.
fully agreed.
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
